Is a benefit in kind for a residence unreasonable? A step in the right direction.

Much has been written in recent years about calculating the benefit in kind for private use of a residence provided by a company. Especially since the benefit in kind for private use of a residence was almost doubled in 2012.

1. Flat-rate determination of the benefit in kind

Since 2012, in accordance with Article 18(2)(2) of the Royal Decree implementing the Income Tax Code (KB/WIB), the benefit has been calculated at a flat rate using the following formula:

                Index-adjusted cadastral income x 100/60 x 1.25 or 3.8. 

The coefficient of 1.25 may only be applied in the case of non-index-adjusted cadastral incomes of €745 or less; the coefficient of 3.8 must be applied in all other cases.

Before 2012 the coefficient for cadastral incomes of more than €745 was only 2, instead of 3.8.

2. Flat-rate benefit vs market rent

When this formula was introduced, the question arose of whether the obligation to calculate the benefit according to a flat rate also applied in circumstances where a market rent was paid by the manager/employee for the private use. The Minister of Finance confirmed that it did, and stated that people in such a situation would still be taxed on the difference between the flat-rate benefit and the market rent, if the flat rate was higher than the rent.

This position has come under heavy criticism in the legal literature. If the rent is set in accordance with prevailing prices in the property market, there can be no question of a benefit being acquired by the manager/employee. Moreover, Article 18 of the KB/WIB refers to the aforementioned calculation only in the case of the “provision of real property or parts of real property free of charge.” If rent is paid, and certainly if it’s market rent, we can only endorse this view, and confirm that in fact there can be no question of a benefit being acquired.

3. Is a flat-rate benefit for a residence provided by a company unconstitutional?

Another point of discussion about the benefit in kind relates to the difference between calculating the benefit for a residence provided by a company and one provided by a natural or self-employed person. The benefit of the private use of a residence provided by a natural person certainly does not consist of increasing the amount by a coefficient of 1.25 or 3.8.

This discussion was recently “resolved” by the Ghent Court of Appeal. Under the Constitution, all taxpayers who are in the same situation should be treated in the same manner, and should thus also be taxed in the same manner. Different treatment is acceptable only where it is objectively and reasonably justifiable in light of the purpose of the tax, and without going beyond what is necessary to achieve that purpose. The Court of Appeal held that nowhere in the legislative texts, royal decrees or preparatory documents could be found an objective and reasonable justification for the different treatment. According to the Court, the tax authorities had also not succeeded in justifying the unequal treatment. As a result, the Court of Appeal decided that such a difference in taxation is unconstitutional.

4. Conclusion

What the impact of this decision will be in practice is not yet clear. In the first instance, we’re waiting for a reaction from the legislature before the decision has any chance of being successfully applied in practice. We think it more than likely that the tax authorities will ignore the decision for now and revert to the KB/WIB, meaning that the formula for calculating the benefit in kind, although disputed, will continue to be applied. The government may appeal the decision to the Court of Cassation or take legislative action to change the way the benefit is calculated. There is nothing to prevent a taxpayer from using a notice of objection to attempt to challenge the calculation of an excessively high benefit in kind, but it should be borne in mind that the debate will most likely end up being conducted in court.

We hope the government will take the necessary steps to bring the flat-rate calculation of the benefit in kind for private use of a residence back down to earth.

We’ll keep monitoring the situation and let you know when there are further developments.

A popular control structure
The all-powerful manager of a civil-law partnership: was it always a fiction?
The civil-law partnership has long been a popular control structure among wealth planners. In many cases, donors do not want to give up their assets entirely, and still want to retain some control over what they donate. Definitely in cases of transfers of family companies, the donors (often parents or family members) still want to retain control over the course of the business.  The advant
The tax framework
Company subsidies: exempted or not?
Various subsidies were briefly described in the article by our colleagues from Strategy and Operations. They explained that they can assist you and your company with guidance on subsidies, from A to Z.1 In this context, we would like to discuss the tax framework for subsidies: how are awarded subsidies treated tax-wise within companies? Are these subsidies exempt from corporation tax and, if
Right to deduct VAT possible for costs incurred during the purchase of shares
The Ryanair ruling
Right to deduct VAT also possible for costs incurred during the purchase of shares, if the purchase ultimately does not (fully) go ahead The European Court of Justice recently confirmed that VAT on costs incurred during the purchase of shares may be deductible even if the purchase ultimately does not (fully) go ahead. As such, the Court of Justice has upheld the principle that the preparatory t
What are the options?
The deduction for investment: an illustration of the options
The deduction for investment allows companies and natural persons who earn profits or benefits to reduce their taxable profits by placing part of the acquisition or investment value of investments in new tangible and intangible fixed assets. Depending on the size of your business and the nature of your activities, you can generally apply the regular, one-off deduction for investment of 20% (tem
Valuation of usufruct
Now also a witch hunt when usufruct is sold?
In previous editions, we have already written about the valuation of usufruct when purchasing property, but recently there have also been regular reports of checks on the valuation of usufruct when reselling. However, up until now, the case law has followed the viewpoint of the taxpayer. Brief description For several years, there has been a lot of controversy regarding the valuation of usufruc
Vlabel is using conciliatory language
Has the decrease in Flemish sales duty led to an increase in the costs for purchases of usufruct?
The decrease in sales duty: also for split purchase usufruct-bare ownership The recent drop in the rate (to 7.00%) for purchases of family homes comes with a number of conditions. For example, the purchaser must be a natural person. Following some uncertainty, it was subsequently confirmed that, in the event of a split purchase of such a property by a company for the usufruct and the bare owner f
The labour market of the future
Earn (on the side) flexibly and untaxed
There are three legal social statuses in Belgium, (i) employee, (ii) self-employed and (iii) civil servant. However, the question is often asked whether these classifications are still relevant to the rapidly evolving labour market in which flexibility is key and many people opt for a 'freelance status' or wish to combine several statuses. Voka has already called for a debate on the labour mark
Is there a notification requirement for your organisation?
Well begun is half done: Prepare your organisation for the go-live of the UBO register.
The register of ultimate beneficiaries (the "UBO register") will go live on 31 October 2018. In one of our previous newsletters we presented an overview of the general framework of the UBO register. The Royal Decree of 30 July 2018, published in the Belgian Official Journal of 14 September 2018, explains this register in detail. We’ve reviewed what your organisation needs to take into account.&n
One of the action points of the ATAD Directive
Impact of the implementation of the Belgian CFC legislation: the de facto tightening of transfer pricing rules?
From 1 January 2019 (fiscal year 2020), the newly introduced CFC rule will come into effect in Belgium, due to the implementation of the ATAD directive1. This new legislation must be interpreted within the broader framework of the Summer Agreement and the reforms within Belgian corporate taxation, which, like the CFC legislation, have resulted in part from the heavily discussed implementation of t
Brexit, e-commerce & VAT action plan are discussed
Pending changes in the area of international VAT
In the previous edition we discussed the expected changes in terms of VAT at a national level. In this article we will briefly consider the VAT changes that are expected internationally.                Brexit  In principle, on 30 March 2019, the ‘Brexit’ will finally be a reality. The United Kingdom will no lon

Subscribe to our newsletter